JOURNAL OF

THE LEPIDOPTERISTS' SOCIETY

Volume 15 1961 Number 4

TAXONOMIC NOTES ON SOME NEARCTIC RHOPALOCEHA. 2. PAPILTONOIDEA

by CYRIL F. DOS P ASSOS

The present paper, like the preceding one on the Hesperioidea (dos Passos, 1960), has as its object to explain the systematic changes which will be in the forthcoming Check List of Nearctic Hhopalocera (Memoirs lepid. soc., no.1).

P APILIONIDJE PARNASSTINJE

During the past half century BANG-HAAS, BRYK, and EISNEH have pub­ lished extensively in several European periodicals on this subfamily, especially on the Parnassius. In these publications they have proposed a great number of new names for and subspecies and a vast quantity of names which they term nomina collectiva. These names appear chiefly in Parnassiana (1930-39), Das Tieneich (1934- 35) and "Parnassiana Nova", a serial paper currcntly appearing in the Zoologische Mededeelingen (1954- ). These nomina collectiva have net been validated by the Inlernational Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, perhaps because no applieatlOn has been made by those authors for that purpose, and it is believed that they have no standing presently in nomenclature. BROWN (1957, p.140) republished a list of some 66 of thcse names together with their English equivalents which appeared originally in Zoologische Afededee­ lingen (1955). It has been the practice of some of those authors to link two or more of these names together by plus (+) signs. In some cases these combinations take up more than one printed line and the pos­ sibilities are by no means exhausted!

209 210 DOS P ASSOS: Papilionoidea VoLl5: no.4

Because these names have often no original description beyond their Latin or Latinized names, no types or localities, and when multiplied do not comply otherwise with the Regles, it has been deemed best to ignore them in this paper and in the Check List. For those interested in pursuing the matter further, attention is called to a paper by Mc­ DUNNOUGH (1936) and an answer (Bryk & Eisner, 1937). Some of the names proposed by these authors as "forms" were treated later by them as nomina collectiva. However, where such names were proposed originally in a valid manner under the Regles as then existing, it is deemed best to retain them in the Check List because they are available for future use. Where such names were not properly written, i.e., in one word, they have been emended to comply with the Regles. In these classes fall all names having an original description, a type, and type locality. All other form names and all nomina collectiva have been omitted from the List. They do not meet the requirements of Zoological Nomenclature. Parnassius eversrnanni wosnesenskii Menetries, 1849. This , de­ scribed from Ochotsk, [Siberia], is treated by BRYK (1934-5, p.140) and BRYK and EISNER (1932, p.93) as a valid subspecies of eversmanni Menetries, 1849 and is omitted from the List. It does not occur in North America. Parnassius nomion Fischer, 1823-24. This species and its synonym americanus Bang-Haas, 1927, have been included in recent Nearctic lists but preceded by an asterisk. EISNER (1957, pp.188-192) does not give any Nearctic locality for the occurrence of this species and it has accordingly been dropped from the List, together with its synonym americanus. Parnassius clodius form maculata Bryk & Eisner, 1937. This name is omitted because it was proposed provisionally for a hypothetical insect. Such names have no standing in nomenclature. Parnassius haldur form medioruhroocellata Bryk & Eisner, 1937. This name is omitted also because it was proposed provisionally for a hypothetical insect.

PAPILIONINJE

Following FORD (1944b) four genera of this subfamily, Battus Scopoli, 1777, Linmeus, 1758, Graphium Scopoli, 1777, and Pari des Hiibner, "1816" [1819] are recognized as occuring in the Nearctic region. Battus devilliersi (Godart), "1819" [1824]. This name and its synonym B. villiersii (Boisduval & Le Conte), 1829, have been omitted from 1961 Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 211 the List because there is no authentic record of the capture of this insect in our faunal area. Papilio Linmeus, 1758. This genus has been restricted to species congeneric in the strict sense with P. glaucus the type species. americus Kollar, 1850. This name is omitted as a result of BROWN'S (1942, p.291) statement that it does not occur in the N em·ctie region. abo ehrmanni McDunnough, 19;38. McDuNNOUGH (1938, p.5) lists this name but the original description by EHRMANN has not been found. There is an abo ehrmanni Ehrmann (1925) listed also by McDuNNOUGH (supra) under Papilio polyxenes Linnaous, 1758, so the former name must be ascribed to McDuNNOUGH and placed as an aberration of glaucus. Papilio carolinianus George Edwards in Catesby, 177l. HOLLAND (1931, p.321), who used (erroneously) Papilio ajax Linnaous, (1758) for this insect suggests that Papilio carolinianus should be used instead of P. marcellus Cramer "1779" [1777] for the spring form (gen. vern.) . The name Papilio ajax has been suppressed by the International Com­ mission on Zoological Nomenclature (Opinion 286) so the name carolinianus would have to be used for the insect except for the fact that Opinion 259 invalidates the work in which it was published. The next available name is marcellus Cramer "1779" [1777]. Graphittm celadon (Lucas), 1852. This name has been omitted from the List because there is no authentic record of the capture of the insect in our faunal area.

PIERIDLE (Opinion 500)

DISMORPHIINLE

Enantia Hubner, "1816" [1819]. has been used for Papilio melite Johansson, 1763, instead of Dismorphia Hubner, 1816. (See Ford, 1941, p.74). Johansson, 1763. McDuNNOUGH (1938, p.7) ascribes this name to JOHANSSON. FORD (1941, p.75) ascribes melite to LINNAEUS. It seems to the author that JOHANNSON should be credited with this name. The insect is of doubtful occurrence in the Nearctic region.

PIERINLE Appias iZlllire (Godart), 1819. This name and its synonyms A. mysia (Godart), 1819, described from , A. margarita (Hubner), "1806" [1825] and A. molpodi (Hubner), 1823, have been omitted from the 212 DOS P ASSOS: Papilionoidea taxonomy Vol. 15 : no.4

List becallsc the insect does not OCCllr in our faunal area. The author is not unmindful of the record of ilaire from Colorado by BROWN (1942, p.82) but he advises (in litt.) that he only saw the insect on a flower and that most likely it was what is now called App·ias drusilla (Cramer), "1779" r1777] . Pieri.s· protodice Boisduval & Le Conte, 1829, and P. oeeidentalis Reakirt, "1866-7" (1866). These appear to be conspecific and have been combined under the older name but the latter name retained , . as a SU DSpeCleS. Pieris napi venosa abo <;' flava Edwards, 1881. The author is aware of the fact that COCKA YNE (19.52) claims that this is a nomen nudum for lack of a description but it is believed that the words "A large per­ centage of female venosa are yellow on the upper side ..." (pp.89, 98) together with p1.2, f.7 <;' comply with the Regles and thus the name should be recognized as a form <;' of venosa. Pieris nopi eastoria abo flava Edwards, 1881. EDWARDS mentions (pp.94, 98) a yellow male and female of castoria and it is apparent that he applied the name to that aberration. In any event the name is a synonym of abo reseda' Boisduval, 1869. Pieris ochsenheimer Staudinger, 1886. This name, proposed for speci­ mens from Central Asia, has appeared in several Nearctic Lists on the basis apparently of 2 males, 1 female received by SKINNER (1897, p.156) from STRECKER from M t. \VrangcI, Alaska. VERITY (1911, p.324) does not believe that it is distinct from P. napi and it has accordingly been omitted from the List. Pieris rapre xstivus Verity, 1913. This name appears to be a synonym and a homonym of P. rap~e restiv(l Zeller (1847). Both were proposed for Palearctie specimens representing the fourth generation of rapce. They are accordingly omitted from the List.

COLIADINJE

Colias Fabricius, 1807 (Opinion 146). This genus has given the greatest trouble to present in a systematic manner. There appears to be considerable hybridization between "species" and few students agree where "species" and "subspecies" begin and end. The present arrangement, based somewhat on the food plants of the larvao when known, is offered with no assurance that it will prove final. Most of the changes in the previous set-up are explained in these notes. C olias hecla palmnedes Hemming, 1934. HEMMING ( 19.'34, p.98) claims that hecla var. pallida Skinner, 1892, is a homonym of 1961 Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 213

Esper abo

C. n. subarctica McDunnough, 1928, was named from Bernard Harbor, Northwest Territory, substantially the same locality. In the circumstances these names appear to be synonymous so the oldest one will be used in the Check List. Eurema nise (Cramer), "1779" [1776]. This controversial name has had a long and complicated history but only recent events need be mentioned in this paper. For lack of specimens MUNROE (1950, pp.180- 181) suggested that the type locality Jamaica might be erroneous, but since he wrote, a series agreeing in all respects with CRAMER'S figure has been received from that island and commented upon by KLOTS and HEINEMAN (1957, p.198), thus establishing the fact that CRAMER'S type locality Jamaica was correct. Two recognizable subspecies of nise occur in North America. The spring brood of the one occurring in Florida resembles the spring brood of the Jamaican insect. However, there are few, if any, second brood specimens from Jamaica, so that it is not known whether that brood resembles the second Florida brood or not. However, it is assumed by the author that such is the case and the Check List therefore treats nise nise as occurring in Florida and n. nelphe in Texas as a stray from Mexico. RIODINIDJE

Two subfamilies are recognized as occurring in the Nearctic region, Euselasiinre and Riodininre. RIODININJE

Apodemia mormo mormonia (Boisduval), 1869. This name has been given subspecific standing for the population occurring in Washington and Oregon. Lephelisca Barnes & Lindsey, 1922. There are differences of opinion concerning the proper generic name to be used for the species of which Erycina virginiensils Guerin-Meneville, 1831, is typical. Nymphidirt Boisduval & Le Conte [1833] is the earliest name but FLElJ) (1948, p.207) claims that it is merely a misspelling or emenda­ tion of Nymphidium Fabricius, 1807. McALPINE (in litt.) contends that Calephelis Grote & Robinson, 1869, should be used, but that name is based upon a misdetermined type species and would not seem to be available until the Commission has passed on the problem. Recent authors such as KLOTS (1951, p.122) and BROWN, et aZ. (1955, p.1l7) use Lephelisca and that practice will be followed in the Check List, without, however, desiring to prejudice the question when it may come before the Commission. 1961 Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 215

LYC.tENID.!E

THECLIN.!E

Strymon HUbner, 1818 (Opinion 165). This genus needs revising. With the exception of one or two species that have been removed therefrom and placed elsewhere the species are listed substantially as by McDuNNOUGH (1938). Strymon eurytulus (HUbner), "1816" [1819]. COMSTOCK and HUNT­ INGTON (1943, p.87) consider this a Brazilian insect so the name is omitted from the List. HUbner gave no type locality. Strymon liparops Le Conte, [27 July, 1833]. This name has been ascribed usually to Boisduval & Le Conte, but a glance at the original description (p.99) shows that those authors considered it a Le Conte name, since his name alone is printed after the specific name. When these authors claimed joint authorship the specific name was followed sometimes by "nobis". Mr. FRANCIS HARPER, of Mount Holly, New Jersey, has called attention (in litt.) to the fact that the name John Eatton Le Conte should be written that way, and not Leconte as is usually done by lepidopterists. He has made a thorough study of this problem and will publish his data. Strymon lycus Skinner, 1898. COMSTOCK and HUNTINGTON (1943, p.73) have pointed out that it is difficult to tell to which HUbner name SKINNER referred because HUbner does not appear to have published any name with this exact spelling. He did publish Urbanus celebris Iicus (1807, Samm. exot. Schmett. 1: pl.[150]) and Bethys lydus ("1816" [1819] Verz. bekant. Schmett.: 175, no.753) but these species are quite distinct from sim;;ethis Drury, "1770" [1773], in the synonymy of which COMSTOCK and HUNTINGTON place lycus. KLOTS (1951) omits this name and has been followed in the Check List. Strymon salona Hewitson, 1868. McDuNNOUGH ( 1938, p.24) places this name as a synonym of S. columella. COMSTOCK and HUNTINGTON ( 1943, p. 78) placed it as a synonym of Thecla bubastus bubastus (Stoll), "1782" [1784], a non-Nearctic insect, consequently it is omitted from the List.

SPALGINJE

This subfamily name was proposed by HOLLAND (1931, p.244) to replace GeIYdinre Fruhstorfer (1907) but has not met with general acceptance. By its nutrition from plant lice, the American genus Feniseca forms to a certain degree a parallel with the Indian GERYDINI (Seitz 216 DOS PASSOS: Papilionoidea taxonomy VoLl5: no.4

5: 743) and there appears no substantial reason for a new name until more is known about these unusual insects. KLOTS (1951, p.149) used Gerydinre and is followed.

PLEBEJINJE

H erniargus catilina Fabricius, 1793. This name is omitted from the List in accordance with the view of COMSTOCK (1944, p.494) that it is the subspecies of Leptotes cassius occurring in the Virgin Islands. See also COMSTOCK and HUNTINGTON (1943, p.91). hanno Stoll, "1791" [1790]. This name has been omitted from the List on the strength of the study by COMSTOCK and HUNTINGTON (1943, p.l04) of the species and its synonyms from which it is concluded that the insect was described from Surinam and does not occur in the N earctic region. Lycceides argyrognornon kodiak Edwards, "1870-1" (1870). N ABOKOV ( in litt.) advises that he considers kodiak to be a subspecies of Plebejus (Icaricia) icarioides (Boisduval), 1852, but it is retained for the present in Lycceides because he, NABOKOV ("1943" [19441, p.91), has not excluded it in the only published record found. No type has been discovered.

LIBYTHEIDJE

LIBYTHEINJE

Libytheana motya (Boisduval & Le Conte), "1833" [1834]. Although this name is usually ascribed to BOISDUV AL and LE CONTE it is not, in this writer's opinion, a new name but a misdetermination of Heccerge rnotya HUbner, [1823]. That insect does not occur in our faunal area and con­ sequently the name is omitted from the List.

NYMPHALIDJE

CHARAXINJE

Ancea aidea morrisoni (Edwards), 1883. McDuNNOUGH (1938, p.22) gives HOLLAND as the author of this subspecies and so did HOLLAND (1931, p.173). There is nothing invalid about EDWARDS' publication of this name (1883, p.35) and he should be credited with the authorship.

APATURINJE

Chlorippe Boisduval, 1870. KLOTS (1951, pp.280, 313) used this name for Asterocarnpa pavon (Latreille), "1811" [1809] but it is a homonym of 1961 Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 217

Chlorippe Doubleday (1840). It would seem that pavon should be in­ cluded in Limenitis. Apatura Auetorum nee Fabricius (1807), as well as Chlorippe Boisduval nee Doubleday, are synonyms of Asteroeampa Rober (1916).

EURYTELINiE

ERGOLINiE vs. EURYTELINiE. ORFILA (1952, p.103) has called attention to the fact that ERGOUNI and EURYTEUNI are based on the genera Ergolis Boisduval, 1836, and Eurytela Boisduval, 1833, both be­ longing to the same tribe as defined by MUNROE (1949, p.67). Con­ sequently Eurytela having priority, he sank ERGOUNI for EURYTEUNI and similar action must be taken when these names are used for subfamilies as contemplated in the Check List. Hamadryas februa gudu.la Fruhstorfer, (1916). While this insect was described from the population occurring in western Mexico, the type in the British Museum (Natural History) is labeled "Texas". Consequently this name is included in the Check List. Evonyme Hubner, "1816" [1819]. DE LA TORRE Y CALLEJAS (1952, p.68) has pointed out that this name has line priority over Eunica Hubner, "1816" [1819] and considers apparently that the respective type species are congeneric. He believes that Eunica should be retained as a nomen eonservandum. It has seemed best to treat DE LA TORRE as the first reviser and retain Eunica on that theory.

LIMENITINiE

Limenitis arthemis (Drury), 1773, and L. astyanax (Fabricius), 1775. These insects are considered conspecific by KLOTS (1951, p.1l6) but that opinion is not followed. While it is true that there is a narrow zone between their respective habitats where they interbreed, that fact does not necessarily make them one species. In any event, the problem is a subjective matter and these insects have been treated as distinct species. Adelpha Hubner, "1816" [1819]. Following CHERMOCK (1950, p.536) Adelpha bredowii Geyer, 1837 has been referred to Limenitis (Adelpha) Hubner, "1816" [1819]. Anartia jatropha! Johansson, 176.'3. GILLHAM (1957, p.19) has placed all Caribbean subspecies in the synonymy of jatropha~ but is not followed insofar as the subspeCies quantanamo Munroe, 1942, and luteipicta Fruhstorfer, 1907, occurring in the Nearctic region, are concerned. Anartia saturata Staudinger, 1884. This name listed by McDUNNOUGH (1938, p.21) as a subspecies of iatropha! is omitted on the authority of 218 DOS PASSOS: Papilionoidea taxonomy VoLl5: no.4

MUNROE (1942, p.3) because it does not occur in the Nearctic region. MUNROE considers Port au Prince, Haiti, as the type locality of this insect. Anartia jatrophce jamaicensis M6schler, 1886. This name listed by McDuNNOUGH (1938, p.21) as a synonym of A. i. saturata Staudinger, 1884, is omitted from the List because, according to MUNROE (1942, p.3), it occurs only in Jamaica and not in the Nearctic region.

VANESSINJE

Vanessa atalanta italica Stichel, (1909). This name has been used by MATURO (1953, p.154) for what he considers the North American subspecies of atalanta. However, it is not believed that a name proposed for the south and central Italian subspecies should be so used and he has not been followed. Vanessa cardui carduelis (Seba), 1765. This name has been used also by MATURO (1953, pp.150, 154), who ascribes it to Cramer, "1779" [1776], for the North American race of cardui. The name appears to have been proposed by SEBA (1765, pp.4, 6). However that may be, it is not deemed desirable to introduce the name in the Nearctic List as a subspecies until some reasons are given for differentiating it from the nominate form. junonia Hiibner, "1816" [1819]. HEMMING (1934, p.73) considers the type species of Precis Hiibner, "1816" [1819], and junonia to be congeneric, but DE LESSE (1952, pp.74-77), who studied the genitalia of most of the species, concluded otherwise and assigns the Nearctic species to junonia. He has been followed in the Check List. Nymphalis vau-album ([Denis & Shiffermiiller]), 1775. GILLHAM (1956, p.27) has used this name for the Holarctic species and placed V [anessa] i-album Boisduval & Le Conte, "1833" [1834], and Aglais i-album watsoni Hall (1924) in the synonymy. He is not followed insofar as the subspecific synonymy is concerned, it being the author's opinion that both i-album and watsoni differ sufficiently to be recognized as valid subspecies. This is one of the many subjective matters concerning which the lumpers and splitters will never agree. N ymphalis antiopa (Linmeus), 1758. ELIOT (1956, p.270) has pointed out that the Southern Palearctic subspecies is double brooded and sug­ gested using the name N. a. grandis EHRMANN (1900) for this population. This suggestion he later (1957, p.162) withdrew on the advice of FORBES ( in litt.) because it was claimed that this name (grandis) " ... is based on characters that are aberrational, not racial". While this is not a valid objection to the use of the name, because between 1948 and 1958 1961 Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 219 aberrational names have been available as specific or subspecific names, nevertheless there is an earlier name lintnerii Fitch, 1858, which can be used for the southern subspecies. This name is given hereby subspecific standing. The type locality is Schoharie, New York. Nymphalis antiopa abo hippolyta (Lyman), 1898. This name was published conditionally and hence is invalid. It was next used by SKINNER ( 1898), who wrote it hippolita in the text (p.22) and hippolyta in the index (p.vii). It is believed best to ascribe the name to SKINNER and to use the text spelling. Nymphalis antiopa creta (Verity), 1916. This name was used erroneously by CLARK and CLARK (1937, p.88) and CLARK and TRAINER (1941, p.39) for a subspecies of N. antiopa occurring in Virginia but described from Tuscany. It has not been included in the List since, as observed above, three names are available for the American sub­ species. Poly gonia marsyas ( Edwards), "1870-1" (1870) " This insect has been given subspecific standing. The examination of a long series appears to establish that it is more than a form of satyrus (Edwards), 1875. Chlosyne lacinia rufescens Cockerell, 1894. This name has been credited usually to Edwards, 1893, but Cockerell is the author. EDWARDS' paper is not very clear. It consists mostly of quotations from letters of COCKERELL wherein he gives descriptions and names to a number of forms of Chlosyne. However, for rufescens there are two descriptions and EDWARDS did not state to which one the name was applicable. The following year (1894) COCKERELL cleared up this ambiguity, so the authorship of the name must be ascribed to that author.

MELITtEINLE

Phyciodes (Phyciodes) thams pulchella (Boisduval), 1852. The name pulchella is recognized as a subspecies of thams (Drury), "1770" [1773], with pascoensis Wright, 1905, as a synonym. BOISDUVAL described this insect from California and stated that it inhabits a large part of that State. McDUNNOUGH (1938, p.19) lists pascoensis as the Western sub­ species of thams but pulchella has priority. Brenthis mnone Scudder and Phyciodes mnone Scudder, 1863. These names are so listed by McDUNNOUGH (1938, pp.16, 19). The latter is listed in the Check List under M elit;;ea (Microtia) nycteis. Both these names represent the same insect, and KLOTS advises (in litt.) that mnone is a synonym of nycteis and is not a Brenthis (Boloria). 220 DOS PASSOS: Papilionoidea taxonomy Vol.l,5: no.4

Melitxa Fabricius, 1807. Following FORBES ("1944" [1945], p.140) and KLOTS (1951, p.94) the American species that have been placed usually in this genus have been transferred to the subgenus Microtia Bates, 1864. HIGGINS ("1958" [1959], p.161) has proposed Texola for some of these species but he does not indicate which species are included or excluded in his new genus beyond specifying that its type is Eresia elada Hewitson, 1868. This is not a Nearctic insect. M elitxa (Microtia) palla calydon (Strecker), 1878. This name has been ascribed usually to MEAD. But the 1875 mention of the name is a nomen nudum. It was next used by STRECKER (1878, p.126) who wrote: "Calydon = some one of the forms of palla", which would appear to constitute him the author. In the Check List it is treated as the subspecies of palla occurring in the Rocky Mountains, the type locality being Turkey Creek Junction, Colorado. M elitxa (Microtia) dymas (Edwards), 1871, and M. (M.) chara (Edwards), 1883. HIGGINS ("1958" [1959], p.161) in proposing Texola states: "It appears that EDWARDS' name dymas 1877 should replace the more familiar name chara Edwards, 1883", but McDUNNOUGH (1938, p.18) treats them both as subspecies and is followed. M elitxa (Microtia) mayi Gunder, 1929. This record requires con­ firmation but the name is retained for the present. The insect cannot be separated from Melitxa ambigua niphona Butler, 1878, which occurs along the Amur River. The specimens upon which GUNDER based the name may have been mislabeled. They were purchased from a dealer. Melitxa (Microtia) britomartis Assman, 1847. This species is reported from the high mountains of Montana and Alberta by VERITY (1935) but that is believed to be a misdetermination so the name is not included in the List. Possibly the insects examined by VERITY were mislabeled. Euphydryas Scudder, 1872. In this genus the classification of GUNDER ( 1929), with a few corrections, has been followed, although it is realized that much work remains to be done with the western species. Euphydryas chalcedona klotsi dos Passos, 1938. When this subspecies was described, GUNDER (1929, p.16) had placed hermosa Wright as a subspecies of anicia. That proved later to be an error because it is a subspecies of chalcedona and comes from substantially the same locality as klotsi. Consequently, the latter name is sunk as a synonym. Euphydryas chalcedona sierra abo umbrobasana J. A. Comstock, 1925. This name has been ascribed usually to GUNDER with the date 1926 but it was published the prior year by COMSTOCK on plate 35, fig.5 of the of California (1927, p.105). Hence the authorship is corrected. This plate was issued two years before the book. 1961 Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 221

ARGYNNINJE

Boloria (Clossiana) euphrosyne (Linnreus), 1758.. This species, its synonym morrisii Reakirt, 1866, and subspecies B. e. andersoni (Dyar), 1904, are of doubtful North American occurrence. B. euphrosyne is European. B. morrisii has been omitted from the List on the strength of STRECKER'S statement (1878, p.1l8) that it was described from an example of Argynnis euphrosyne (Linnreus), which REAKIRT received from LORQUIN, with "California" erroneously given as the locality. None of these names will appear in the Check List. Boloria distincta (Gibson), 1920. This rare Arctic insect, described as a species by its author, seems better placed as a subspecies of B. astarte (Doubleday & Hewitson), "1846-50" [18~l7]. GREY advises (in litt.) that the genitalia are of a similar type to those of B. astarte. Boloria (Clossiana) titania montinus (Scudder), 1862. This sub­ specific name is written "montina" by KLOTS (1951, pp.91, 112, 311), apparently under the mistaken belief that it is an adjective and thus should agree with Boloria in gender. But montinus is a noun and should be so written. Speyeria zerene carolm (dos Passos & Grey), 1942. Since the descrip­ tion of this insect GREY has received more material, and he advises (in litt. ) that he is now convinced that we erred in referring it to S. coronis (Behr), 1864; hence the new combination.

DANAIDJE Dircenna klugii (Geyer), 1837. This name has been omitted from the List because the insect does not occur in the Nearctic region. (Klots 1951, p.276). Ithomia anaphissa Herrich-Schaffer, 1864. This name, sometimes credited to the Nearctic fauna, has been omitted from the List because the insect does not occur in that region (Klots 1951, p.276). Dynothea lycaste negreta Reakirt, 1864. This name has been omitted from the List because the insect does not occur in the Nearctic region. Many of REAKIRT'S species of Danaidre were taken in but mis­ labeled California. Mechanitis californica Reakirt, 1865. This name has been omitted from the List because the insect does not occur in the Nearctic region. It is not cited by J. A. COMSTOCK (1927), and HOLLAND (1931, p.7l) states that it is very doubtful that this insect occurs in California. Danaus (Danaus) plexippus nigrippus Haensch, 1813. This name, representing the southern subspecies, was added to the Nearctic List 222 DOS PASS OS : Papilionoidea taxonomy Vo1.l5: no.4 by CLARK and CLARK (1938, p.179) but is believed to be a misdetermina­ tion of D. p. plexippus. Accordingly it has not been incorporated in the List. Danaus jarnaicensis Bates, 1864. This insect has been reported from Florida by CLARK (1941, p.540 ) but the evidence appears too slight to include the name in the List. The specimen is an old one in the Barnes collection, possibly a subspecies of D. gilippus Cramer, "1779" [1776].

SATYRIDJE

SATYRINJE

Megisto Hubner, "1816" [1819]. The species listed by McDUNNOUGH (1938, p.ll) under this name have been transferred to Euptychia Hubner, "1816" [1819]. Satyrodes Scudder, 1875. This generic name, used by McDuNNOUGH (1938, p.12) for eurydice Johansson (1763, p.406) , has been omitted and the species transferred to Lethe Hubner, "1816" [1819] . Euptychia pyracrnon (Butler), 1866. This name was added to the List by NABOKOV ("1942" [1943], p.70) and removed by R. L. CHERMOCK (1947, p.196). The insect is not believed to occur in the Nearctic region, so it is omitted from the List. Ccenonyrnpha Hubner, "1816" [1819] . Since DAVENPORT'S revision (1941) of this genus there have been several revisions in whole or in part of the Nearctic species, notably by BROWN (1955), with which the author is not in complete agreement. In the Check List six species, counting rnixturata Alpheraky, 1897 and haydeni (Edwards), 1872, are recognized. Ccenonyrnpha parnphilus (Linmeus), 1758. This name, together with its synonym C. parnphiloides Reakirt, 1866, on North American check lists for many years, is omitted as not occurring in the Nearctic region. The former is a European insect, and so apparently is the latter, both probably mislabeled. Cercyonis sthenele (Boisduval), 1852. This name is retained in the List, although the insect is believed to be extinct. (Eneis Hubner, "1816" [1819]. The arrangement of the species and subspecies in this genus has been altered considerably as a result of the author's preliminary studies of the genitalia for a revision. They are arranged in the Check List in accordance with the characters of the male genitalia. CEneis norna (Thunberg), 179l. This name is omitted from the List because the insect is not believed to occur in the faunal area. 1961 Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 223

CEneis alberta Elwes, 1893. This name is ascribed to ELwEs rather than ELWES and EDWARDS since the latter is responsible only for the figures in their joint paper. CE neis polixenes brucei (Ewdards), 1891. There is a name in the literature which has priority over this well known name but it has not been used for about seventy years. In the circumstances it seems best to use the well known name brucei until application is made to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature for the suppres­ sion of the older name. epipsodea sineocellata Skinner, 1889. This name was proposed as "sine-ocellata nov. val'." and in the next line SKINNER wrote that it " ... is a val'. of Epipsodea Butler ... " . The type locality is Fort Qu'­ Appelle, Northwest Territory. EHRLICH (1954, p.27) described Erebia epipsodea freemani from Lloydminster, Alberta, a town actually on the Alberta-Saskatchewan boundary and about 350 miles northwest of Fort Qu'-Appelle but in the same general type of country. The descriptions are fairly similar. In a later paper EHRLICH (1955, p.184) placed sineo­ cellata in the synonymy of freemani on the theory that it is an aberrational name but thereby conceding that they are synonymous. However, sineocellata was not proposed as an aberrational name but as a subspecific name, so it must be used for the population that EHRLICH deemed worthy of recognition.

References Brown, F. M., 1942. Appius [sic] ilaire ilaire Codart in Colorado (Lepid. Pieridre). Ent. news 53: 82 ...... , 1955. Studies of Nearctic Ca'nonympha tullia (Rhopalocera, Satyrid;e) Ca'nonympha tullia inornata Edwards. Bull. Amer. mus. nat. hist. 105: 359-410, 2 pIs., 19 figs., 21 tables ...... , 1957. Infra-subspecific names among Parnassius. Lepid. news 10:140-142. Brown, F. M., D. Eff & B. Rotger, 1955. Colorado butterflies. Part III Libytheidre The Snout Butterflies Riodinid;e The Metalmarks Lyerenid;e The Gossamer­ wings. Pmc. Denver mtts. nat. hist. 5: 113-176, num. figs. Bryk, F., 1934-1935. Baroniid;e, Teinopalpid:e, Parnassiid;e pars 1. Tierreich 64: XXIII + 790 pp., 698 figs. Bryk, F., & C. Eisner, 1932. Kritisehe Revision der Cattung Parnassius unter Benutzung des Materials der Kollektion Eisner, Dahlem. Parnassiana2: 69- 102, 8 figs ...... , 1937. A reply to the critical review of the treatment of the American species of Parnassitts in the "Tierreich" by J. McDunnough in "The Canadian Entomologist". Parnassiana 5: 3-7. Chermock, R. L., 1947. A revisional study of the Ettptychiu pyracmon group. Ent. news 58: 193-204, 12 figs ...... , 1950. A generic revision of the Limenitini of the world. Amer. midi. nat. 43: 513-569, 68 figs. Clark, A. R., 1941. Notes on some North and Middle American danaid butterflies. Proc. U. S. nat. mtts. 90: 531-542, 4 pIs. 224 DOS PASSOS: Papilionoidea taxonomy VoLl5: no.4

Clark, A. H., & L. F. Clark, 1937. Preliminary list of the butterflies of Virginia. Proc. biol. soc. Washington 50: 87-92 ...... , 1938. Notes on Virginia butterflies. Proc. bioI. soc. Washington 51: 177-181...... , 1941. Some early records from Georgia. Proc. ent. soc. Washington 43: 80-85. Clark, A. H., & F. W. Trainer, 1941. Entomology - Butterflies of Farmville, Virginia. Journ. Washington acado sci. 31: 38-40. Cockayne, E. A. [editor], 1952. [Note] Ent. rec. 64: 291. Comstock, W. P., 1944. Insects of Porto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Rhopalocera or butterflies. Scientific Survey of Porto Rico and the Virgin Islands (N. Y. Acad. Sci.), vol.l2: 421-622, 12 pIs., 29 figs. Comstock, W. P., & E. 1. Huntington, 1943. Lycrenidre of the Antilles (Lepidoptera, Rhopalocera). Ann. N.Y. acado sci. 4.5: 49-130, I pI., 2 figs. Davenport, D., 1941. The butterflies of the satyrid genus Ca:nonympha. Bull. mus. camp. zool. 87: 215-349, 10 pIs. Edwards, W. H., 1881. On Pieris bryonia; Ochsenheimer and its derivative forms in Europe and America. Papilio 1: 83-99, pIs. 2, 3. Ehrlich, P. R., 1954. Two new subspecies of Erebia epipsodea Butler (Lepidoptera: Satyridre). Journ. Kansas ent. soc. 27: 80 ...... , 1955. The distribution and subspeciation of Erebia epipsodea Butler (Lepidoptera: Satyridre) . Kansas univ. sci. bull. 37: 175-194, 3 figs. Eisner, C., 1957. Parnassiana nova XV Kritische Revision der Gattung Parnassius (Part 10) . Zool. Meded. 35: 177-203. Eliot, N., 1956. The strange case of the Camberwell Beauty. Entomologist 89: 270-277 ...... ,1957. Nomenclature of Nymphalis antiopa L. Entomologist 90: 162. Field, W. D., 1948. The correct name for the North American butterfly variously called Nymphidia. Calephelis or Lephelisca (Lepidoptera. Riodinidre). Proc. ent. soc. Washington 50: 207-213. Forbes, W. T. M .• 1944. The genus Phyciodes (Lepidoptera, Nymphalinre). Ent. Americana 24: 139-208. 7 pis. Ford. E . B., 1941. Studies on the chemistry of pigments in the Lepidoptera, with reference to their bearing on systematics. 1. The anthoxanthins. Proc. roy. ent. soc. London (A) 16: 65-90 ...... • 1944a. Studies on the chemistry of pigments in the Lepidoptera. with reference to their bearing on systematics. 3. The red pigments of the Papilionidre. Proc. roy. ent. soc. London (A) 19,: 92-106...... • 1944b. Studies on the chemistry of pigments in the Lepidoptera. with reference to their bearing on systematics. 4. The classification of the Papilionidre. Trans. roy. ent. soc. London 94: 201-223. Gillham, N. W., 1956. Nymphalis vau-album (Schiffermiiller & Denis). a Holarctic species (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidre). Psyche 63: 27-29 ...... , 1957. Subspecies versus geographic variation in Caribbean populations of Anartia jatropha; Johansson (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidre). Amer. mus. novitates 1845: 22 pp., 5 figs. Gunder. J. D .• 1929. The genus Euphydryas Scud. of Boreal America (Lepidoptera Nymphalidre). Pan-Pacific ent. 6: 1-8, 12 pIs. Hemming, A. F., 1934. Some notes on the nomenclature of Palrearctic and African Rhopalocera. Proc. roy. ent. soc. London (B) 3: 97-99. Higgins, L. G .• 1959. Four new melitreine genera (Nymphalidre). Lepid. news 12: 161-164, 1 pI. Holland, W. J., 1931. The butterfly book (rev. ed.). xii + 424 pp., 77 pIs. mostly col., 198 figs. Doubleday, Doran & Company, Inc., Garden City, New York. Hovanitz. W.. 1943. The nomenclature of the Colias chrysotheme complex in North America (Lepidoptera, Pieridre). Amer. mus. novitates 1240: 4 pp. 1961 Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 225

Klots, A. B., 1951. A field guide to the butterflies of North America, east of the Great Plains. xvi + 350 pp., 40 pis. (16 colored). Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston. Klots, A. B., & B. Heineman, 1957. The identity of Papilio nise Cramer, 1775 ( Lepidoptera: Pieridre) and a neotype designation for this nominal species. Proc. roy. ent. soc. London (B) 26: 206-213, 1 col. pI. Maturo, F. J. S., Jr., 1953. Range extensions of Rhopalocera in eastern North Carolina. A checklist of the species of Carteret County, N. C. Journ. Elisha Mitchell sci. soc. 69: 150-155. McDunnough, ]. H., 1936. A critical review of the treatment of North American Parnassius species by Felix Bryk in Das Tierreich Part 135. Canadian ent. 68: 216-225 ...... , 1938. Check list of the Lepidoptera of Canada and the United States of America. Part 1 Macrolepidoptera. Mem. so. Calif. acado sci. 1: 1-273 + 4 (corrigenda). Munroe, E. G., 1942. The Caribbean races of Anartia iatrophx Johansson (Lepidop­ tera: Nymphalid:e). Amer. mus. novitates 1179: 4 pp...... , 1949. A new genus of Nymphalid:e and its affinities (Lepidoptera, Rhopalocera). Journ. N. Y . ent. soc. 57: 67-78 . .... , 1950. The dina group of the genus Eurema in the W. Indies (Lepidoptera, Pierid

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTE TO PART 1 (HESPERIOIDEA)

EVANS (1952, p.132) places Thorybes uvydixa Dyar, 1915 as a synonym of Thorybes val1eriana PlOtz, 1882, or "Possibly a sub-species". An ex­ amination of the single specimen of uvydixa in the American Museum of Natural History and a photograph of the type kindlly furnished by Mr. W. D. FIELD of the United States National Museum convinces me that these are distinct species. Since uvydixa has only been recorded from Mexico, it is omitted from the Check List.

Washington Corners, Mendham, N. J., u. S. A.